By Britney Cao
WOODLAND, CA – In Yolo County Superior Court this week, a man—not identified by The Vanguard to protect the identity of the victim—awaited his arraignment on a felony charge of assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury.
Judge Stephen Mock ultimately ruled he will deny release to the man on his own recognizance and set bail at $50,000 to protect the victim and community.
The arraignment began with a petition to revoke the accused’s post release community supervision based on the arrest of the new felony.
Deputy Public Defender James Bradford, who entered pleas of not guilty, noted his client’s criminal and drug history, explaining, “He is dealing with a lot. There has been an effort with everybody involved, probation and his family, to try to get him the services he needs for mental health and drug treatment. I have spoken to him and he indicates that it is amenable to residential treatment assuming he scores for residential treatment.”
The DPD then revealed the accused’s previous violations have been related to homelessness and drug use, and asked the court to authorize OR pretrial release, with no bail.
Deputy District Attorney Tiffany J. Tzang said the assault allegedly committed by the accused involved unprovoked threats to the victim that they would be beaten and attacked. The accused denied attacking the victim, but the prosecution said there is evidence that proves the victim was kicked on the right side of the face with lot of force, leaving a bloody nose.
The DDA, admitting there wasn’t evidence as of yet, suggested there was a possibility the victim lost consciousness and had a broken nose after the assault. The victim’s safety would be in question if the court granted the accused pretrial release.
DDA Tzang said the criminal background of the accused “started back in the 90s with his first strike conviction and after that he has a history of violence including in 2007 of battery. In 2008, he was convicted of felony false imprisonment and another felony false imprisonment in 2012 that ended up in 16 months in prison. In 2013, he was convicted of dissuading a witness and ended up spending 16 months in prison. 2013, he was convicted of 24584 [regarding disguised weapon] and went to prison for 2 years. In 2017 he was convicted of felony DD, went to prison for 2 years, Then in 2019 he went to prison for 4 years for 594 [vandalism] and he is currently PRCS [Post Release Community Supervision].”
Along with the DDA’s statement, the accused’s probation officer added that she was “[h]esitant to request SOR to the court because according to the PRCS violation, it is very clear that these services were offered to him and [he was] never successful in completion of it.”
Responding to both the DDA and probation officer, the DPD explained all these events occurred when the accused was under the influence and may have been going through some mental health issues. DPD Bradford argued he could craft a program with probation and the accused’s family member to break the cycle of substance abuse and mental illness.
Judge Mock stated, “The best thing for society and the defendant would be to address his long-term substance abuse and mental health issues, but the records shows that probation and parole have tried very hard to do that and the defendant has intentionally, or simply because of mental health issues, has sabotaged those attempts.”
The case will be settled at a preliminary examination Oct. 26.
